Go Back   Great Lakes 4x4. The largest offroad forum in the Midwest > General 4x4 Stuff > Politics, Government, or Religion Chat
GL4x4 Live! GL4x4 Casino

Politics, Government, or Religion Chat Bring your flamesuit!







Search
Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old May 23rd, 2008, 06:18 PM   #81
Nuggets
Professional Pisser Offer
 
Nuggets's Avatar
 
Join Date: 09-15-06
Location: Bay City, MI
Posts: 13,302
iTrader: (12)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikesova View Post
x2 i like web wheeling better, less broken parts + less gas

I understand. Just trying to inject some humor and remind people that this is an off road web site.
Nuggets is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 23rd, 2008, 10:01 PM   #82
AGoodBuzz
Senior Member
 
Join Date: 12-09-07
Location: Canton, MI
Posts: 1,557
iTrader: (0)
Quote:
Originally Posted by RyeBread View Post
did I call it nonsense? I don't recall doing so. I do recall stating that there is a fine balancing act between individual rights, and those of the majority.

There are countless nonsensical laws on the books that are non-theistically influenced that could/should draw your ire, but for whatever reason don't. I think that isolating your angst against the theistic based ones just happens to be your cross to bear for whatever reason :tonka: almost makes me wonder if you were slapped around by a nun, or perhaps turned on by one and struggle with the guilt

As for Buzz: I'll also have to do some refreshing on history, as by my off the cuff reckoning the Catholic Church has not ruled the greater part of the world for 1,000 years... For one, to my knowledge it has never ruled the orient/indo-china, and while Great Britain may have ruled India as a colony, the dominant British religion/denomination certainly wasn't in control of India.

I'm done with the thread for a while, as the commute home beckons.
You're right Rye. It ruled the world as it knew it. To be more specific, it ruled all of Rome and its conquests, which pretty much comprised the majority of the warring world. Conquest after conquest over a long period of time brought the RCC with it. You're technical point is absolutely correct and I misspoke. I agree. You're right.

But you must agree that the conquering nations drug the RCC along and left a trail of it, by hook or by crook, everywhere it went.

Insofar as the other nontheistic laws, maybe, just maybe, he doesn't know about whatever laws you are referring to, so please feel free to offer them up on another thread and maybe we'll all get together and do something about them.
AGoodBuzz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 23rd, 2008, 10:08 PM   #83
AGoodBuzz
Senior Member
 
Join Date: 12-09-07
Location: Canton, MI
Posts: 1,557
iTrader: (0)
Quote:
Originally Posted by RyeBread View Post
the majority of phelps' own children have been quoted as suggesting that he isn't religious, and that his 'church' and supposed religious beliefs are a cover for his addiction to hatred.

I certainly hope you aren't attempting to suggest that he is a legitimate representative of the Christian faith.

That's like trying to suggest that all homosexuals are serial killers since afterall, the following prominent ones were homosexuals: Andrew Cunanan, John Wayne Gacy, Patrick Wayne Kearney, Gilles de Rais, Randy Steven Kraft, Michael Swango, Andrei Chikatilo, David D. Hill, Wayne Williams, Larry Eyler, Henry Lee Lucas, Fritz Haarmann, and Jeffery Dahmer
You bring up a great point though Rye.

First: why is it that all kinds of people claim to be the "right" representatives of the Christian faith, just like we might infer about you by your discounting another, yet whenever they are identified as hypocritical, phony, whatever, you just say that they don't represent the faith? I would say that they represent it, as individuals, as much as you do. No more, no less, because they claim it to be; however, they have many followers, and you have none, so it seems to me that they are scoring higher in their teachings than you are.

Second: You have identified a pattern. That's scientific method (sort of); however your conclusion was not scientific because it was reverse logic. Your examples don't suggest that homosexuals are serial killers, but they DO suggest that many serial killers were homosexuals. World of difference, and you know it,.

Shoud I have stayed out of that one? Sorry.
AGoodBuzz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 23rd, 2008, 11:42 PM   #84
RyeBread
Catch the wave
 
RyeBread's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-08-05
Location: Fenton
Posts: 7,936
iTrader: (2)
Quote:
Originally Posted by AGoodBuzz View Post
You bring up a great point though Rye.

First: why is it that all kinds of people claim to be the "right" representatives of the Christian faith, just like we might infer about you by your discounting another, yet whenever they are identified as hypocritical, phony, whatever, you just say that they don't represent the faith? I would say that they represent it, as individuals, as much as you do. No more, no less, because they claim it to be; however, they have many followers, and you have none, so it seems to me that they are scoring higher in their teachings than you are.
a simple statistical correlation can be made from inferring the vast majority of Christians, and their outrage at the phelps clan. when a majority of his own family disowns him (according to the wiki) and he is almost universally reviled I should think that someone of your own intellect should be able to conclude that perhaps, he/they are just a little bit off the scale/continuum...

Quote:
Originally Posted by AGoodBuzz View Post
Second: You have identified a pattern. That's scientific method (sort of); however your conclusion was not scientific because it was reverse logic. Your examples don't suggest that homosexuals are serial killers, but they DO suggest that many serial killers were homosexuals. World of difference, and you know it,.

Shoud I have stayed out of that one? Sorry.
no worries, my analogy was no more absurd than mikey's. interesting that you chose to essentially speak towards causation vs. correlation on this side, but don't choose to take your buddy mikey to task for repeatedly doing the same exact thing - either explicitly, or by inference...

mike has established a pattern on this site of asking questions that aren't questions, but rather tossed out there for flamebait with clear implications. he intentionally used phelps as what he apparently believes is a poster child for Christian hate mongering. while they are in fact hate mongering dolts, they are not Christians, regardless of whether they thump a bible.

let's use a non-religious example. if one is elected to office as a professed conservative republican, but votes and speaks publicly of supporting tax and spend liberalism are they really a conservative republican?

it goes back to one of my earlier comments in this sub forum. I can call myself a talented vocalist all I want, it doesn't make it so, even if I manage to collect a small following that agrees with me...
RyeBread is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 24th, 2008, 07:35 AM   #85
mikesova
My 4x4 is a Subaru.
 
mikesova's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-05-05
Location: Gladwin, MI
Posts: 7,666
iTrader: (1)
Send a message via AIM to mikesova
From what I've read and heard, Phelp's faith is a Calvinist view including predestination and very strict interpretation of the bible. He's letting people know that they are going to hell. Kind of like Drew. On the other hand, Phelps isn't trying to witness anyone because of the Calvinism, he thinks that it's already been predetermined who is hellbound and who is not, he does what he does because of his interpretation of the bible about spreading the news etc. How is his interpretation any better/worse than anyone else's? Personally, I think if you're going to take some things literally and some not, that is not being true to the book if you believe that it's God's divine word. Why do Christians eat pork and Shrimp and then believe that homosexuality is a sin?
mikesova is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 24th, 2008, 08:53 AM   #86
Nuggets
Professional Pisser Offer
 
Nuggets's Avatar
 
Join Date: 09-15-06
Location: Bay City, MI
Posts: 13,302
iTrader: (12)
Moving closer to becoming a Pastafarian.
Nuggets is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 24th, 2008, 10:30 AM   #87
no1likesme
not Frank Sinatra
 
no1likesme's Avatar
 
Join Date: 04-10-08
Location: shepherd, MI
Posts: 678
iTrader: (0)
Send a message via AIM to no1likesme Send a message via MSN to no1likesme
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuggets View Post
Moving closer to becoming a Pastafarian.
Ramen Brother
no1likesme is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply
Great Lakes 4x4. The largest offroad forum in the Midwest > General 4x4 Stuff > Politics, Government, or Religion Chat
Tags
flame suit burned up

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:30 AM.


Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright 2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2005 - 2012 Cracker Enterprises - Powered by Linux
vB Ad Management by =RedTyger=
Page generated in 0.15902 seconds with 24 queries